10.07.2015 Views

IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

IPCC_Managing Risks of Extreme Events.pdf - Climate Access

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Chapter 8Toward a Sustainable and Resilient Future(where the knowledge <strong>of</strong> women, children, or the elderly may not berecognized), within communities (where divisions among social groupsmay hinder learning), or within nations (where marginalized groups maynot be heard, and where social division and political power influencethe development and adaptation agenda). Disaster periods are frequentlythe times when the development visions and aspirations for the future<strong>of</strong> those most affected are not recognized. This reflects a widespreadlimitation on the quality and comprehensiveness <strong>of</strong> local participationin disaster risk reduction and its integration into everyday developmentplanning. Instead, the humanitarian imperative, limited-term reconstructionbudgets, and an understandable desire for rapid action over deliberationmeans that too <strong>of</strong>ten international social movements and humanitariannongovernmental organizations, government agencies, and local relieforganizations impose their own values and visions, <strong>of</strong>ten with the best<strong>of</strong> intentions. It is also important to recognize the potential for somepeople or groups to prevent sustainable decisions by employing theirveto power or lobbying against reforms or regulations based on shorttermpolitical or economic interests (Klein, 2007). The distribution <strong>of</strong>power in society and who has the responsibility or right to shape thefuture through decisionmaking today is thus significant, and includesthe role <strong>of</strong> international as well as national and local actors. Within theinternational humanitarian community, efforts such as the SphereStandards and the Humanitarian Accountability Partnership are stepstoward addressing this challenge.Actions to reduce disaster risk and responses to climate changeinvariably involve trade<strong>of</strong>fs with other societal goals, and conflictsrelated to different values and visions for the future. Innovative andsuccessful solutions that combine multiple perspectives, differingworldviews, and contrasting ways <strong>of</strong> organizing social relations have beendescribed by Verweij et al. (2006) as ‘clumsy solutions.’ Such solutions,they argue, depend on institutions in which all perspectives are heardand responded to, and where the quality <strong>of</strong> interactions among competingviewpoints foster creative alternatives. Drawing on the developmentethics literature, St. Clair (2010) notes that when conflict and broadbaseddebate arise, alternatives <strong>of</strong>ten flourish and many potentialspaces for action can be created, tapping into people’s innovation andcapacity to cope, adapt, and build resilience. Pelling (2010a) stressesthe importance <strong>of</strong> social learning for transitional or transformationaladaptation, and points out that it requires a high level <strong>of</strong> trust, awillingness to experiment and accept the possibility <strong>of</strong> failure inprocesses <strong>of</strong> learning and innovation, transparency <strong>of</strong> values, and activeengagement <strong>of</strong> civil society. Committing to such a learning process is,as Tschakert and Dietrich (2010, p. 17) argue, preferable to alternativesbecause “learning by shock is neither an empowering nor an ethicallydefensible pathway.”The conjuncture <strong>of</strong> hazard and vulnerability, realized through disasters,forces coping and adaptation on individuals and society. <strong>Climate</strong> changeand ongoing development place more people and assets at risk.Noteworthy progress in disaster risk management has been made,especially through the action <strong>of</strong> early warning on reducing mortality,but underlying vulnerability remains high (as indicated by increasingnumbers <strong>of</strong> people affected and economic losses from disaster) anddemographic and economic development trends continue to raise thestakes and present a choice: risk can be denied or faced, and adaptationcan be forced or chosen. A reduction in the disaster risks associatedwith climate and weather extremes is therefore a question <strong>of</strong> politicalchoice that involves addressing issues <strong>of</strong> equity, rights, and participationat all levels.ReferencesA digital library <strong>of</strong> non-journal-based literature cited in this chapter thatmay not be readily available to the public has been compiled as part <strong>of</strong>the <strong>IPCC</strong> review and drafting process, and can be accessed via either the<strong>IPCC</strong> Secretariat or <strong>IPCC</strong> Working Group II web sites.AAG, 2003: Global Change and Local Places: Estimating, Understanding, andReducing Greenhouse Gases. Association <strong>of</strong> American Geographers, CambridgeUniversity Press, Cambridge, UK, 290 pp.Adger, W.N., 1996: Approaches to Vulnerability to <strong>Climate</strong> Change. CSERGE WorkingPaper #GEC 96-05, University <strong>of</strong> East Anglia, Norwich, UK, 66 pp.Adger, W.N., 2000: Social and ecological resilience: are they related? Progress inHuman Geography, 24(3), 347-364.Adger, W.N., 2003: Social capital, collective action, and adaptation to climatechange. Economic Geography, 79(4), 387-404.Adger, W.N., 2004: The right to keep cold. Environment and Planning A, 36(10),1711-1715.Adger, W.N., S. Huq, K. Brown, D. Conway, and M. Hulme, 2003: Adaptation toclimate change in the developing world. Progress in Development Studies, 3(3),179-195.Adger, W.N., T.P. Hughes, C. Folke, S.R. Carpenter, and J. Rockstrom, 2005: Socialecologicalresilience to coastal disasters. Science, 309, 1036-1039.Adger,W.N., S. Agrawala, M.M.Q. Mirza, C. Conde, K. O’Brien, J. Pulhin, R. Pulwarty,B. Smit, and K. Takahashi, 2007: Assessment <strong>of</strong> adaptation practices, options,constraints and capacity. In: <strong>Climate</strong> Change 2007: Impacts, Adaptation andVulnerability. Contribution <strong>of</strong> Working Group II to the Fourth Assessment Report<strong>of</strong> the Intergovernmental Panel on <strong>Climate</strong> Change [Parry, M.L., O.F. Canziani,J.P. Palutik<strong>of</strong>, P.J. van der Linden and C.E. Hanson (eds.)], Cambridge UniversityPress, Cambridge, UK, pp. 717-743.Adger, W.N., J. Barnett, and H. Ellemor, 2010: Unique and valued places. In: <strong>Climate</strong>Change Science and Policy [Schneider, S. H., A. Rosencranz, M. Mastrandrea,and K. Kuntz-Duriseti (eds.)]. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp. 131-138.Adger, W.N., K. Brown, D. Nelson, F. Berkes, H. Eakin, C. Folke, K. Galvin, L.Gunderson, M. Goulden, K. O’Brien, J. Ruitenbeek, and E. Tompkins, 2011:Resilience implications <strong>of</strong> policy responses to climate change. WIRES <strong>Climate</strong>Change, doi:10.1002/WCC.133.Adly, E. and T. Ahmed, 2009: Water and food security in the river Nile basin:Perspectives <strong>of</strong> the government and NGOs in Egypt. In: Facing GlobalEnvironmental Change: Environmental, Human, Energy, Food, Health and WaterSecurity Concepts [Brauch, H.G., N.C. Behera, P. Kameri-Mbote, J. Grin, Ú.Oswald Spring, B. Chourou, C. Mesjasz, and H. Krummenacher (eds.)]. Springer,Berlin, Germany, pp. 645-654.Agarwal, B., 1991: Social security and the family: Coping with seasonality andcalamity in rural India. In: Social Security in Developing Countries [Ahmad, E., J.Dreze, J. Hills, and A. Sen (eds.)]. Clarendon Press, Oxford, UK, pp. 171-244.Agrawala, S. (ed.), 2005: Bridge over Troubled Waters: Linking <strong>Climate</strong> Change andDevelopment. Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, Paris,France, 153 pp.471

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!